George Avalos v. Royal Inn Motel, LLC

Summary

On January 31, 2020, George Avalos filed a Complaint in California State court against Royal Inn Motel, LLC. Plaintiff George Avalos alleges that www.royalinnca.com is not accessible per the WCAG 2.0, Section 508 accessibility standard(s).

About the defendant

The Royal Inn Motel operates in Long Beach, CA.

What the complaint says

The problems the plaintiff describes with the website.

• On the homepage of www.royalinnca.com, there is a general description ofthe Hotel's location and features; however, none of the information provided relates to accessibility as required by Disability Access Laws
• There is a section labeled "Amenities" which offers a list amenities the hotel offers; however, none ofthe information provided relates to accessibility as required by Disability Access Laws
• Remaining links from the homepage do not contain information regarding accessibility as required by Disability Access Laws
• When attempting to make a reservation, Plaintiff was only able to find one room option labeled "Single Room- Disability Access;" however, the room description provided lacks specificity and does not provide sufficient detail for Plaintiffto determine whether the Subject Property will meet her accessibility needs
• The Website, including the reservations aspect, does not indicate with any degree of detail whether the Hotel offers accessible features, including but not limited to parking and/or accessible pathways to the accessible entrance(s), or accessible pathways to resort amenities
• The Website does not permit reservation of accessible rooms in the same manner as other rooms including the identification of accessible features of rooms and of the Subject Property in enough detail to reasonably permit Plaintiff to assess independently whether a given hotel or guest room meets their accessibility needs

Legal claims

The laws the plaintiff says the defendant broke, called causes of action.

• Violations of the Unruh Civil Rights Act, California Civil Code § 51 et seq.
• Declaratory Relief on Behalf of Plaintiff

What the plaintiff asks for

What the plaintiff wants the court to order.

• A preliminary and permanent injunction enjoining Defendants from further violations ofthe Unruh Act, Civil Code § 51 et seq. requiring Defendants to take the steps necessary to ensure that Defendants' maintain and implement policies and procedures
• A declaration that since March 15, 2012, Defendants discriminated against persons with mobility impairments by failing to ensure that Defendants’ reservations service offered through the Website allowed persons with mobility impairments to independently identify accessible features of Defendants’ Hotel and rooms and independently reserve accessible rooms in the Hotel, and the Defendants did not comply with the requirements of 28 CF § 36.302(e)(1) et seq. in violation of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12181 et seq. as amended by the ADA Amendments Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-325), 28 CFR § 36.302(e)(1) et seq., and California’s Unruh Act, California Civil Code §§51-52
• Statutory damages pursuant to California Civil Code § 52(a), for each and every violation of law
• Plaintiff hereby expressly limits the injunctive relief to require that Defendants expend no more than $50,000 thereon
• Plaintiff seeks no relief related to any architectural barriers to access in this Complaint and expressly limits all claims to injunctive relief to modifications of Defendants’ policies and procedures related to the Website
• For attorneys' fees and expenses pursuant to all applicable laws including, without limitation, Civil Code § 52(a)
• An order awarding Plaintiff’s post-judgment interest
• For such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper